Assessing the use of assisted reproductive technology in the United States by non-United States residents
- PMID: 28916332
- PMCID: PMC11286221
- DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.07.1168
Assessing the use of assisted reproductive technology in the United States by non-United States residents
Abstract
Objective: To study cross-border reproductive care (CBRC) by assessing the frequency and nature of assisted reproductive technology (ART) care that non-U.S. residents receive in the United States.
Design: Retrospective study of ART cycles reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National ART Surveillance System (NASS) from 2006 to 2013.
Setting: Private and academic ART clinics.
Patient(s): Patients who participated in ART cycles in the United States from 2006 to 2013.
Intervention(s): None.
Main outcome measure(s): Frequency and trend of ART use in the U.S. by non-U.S. residents, countries of residence for non-U.S. residents, differences by residence status for specific ART treatments received, and the outcomes of these ART cycles.
Result(s): A total of 1,271,775 ART cycles were reported to NASS from 2006 to 2013. The percentage of ART cycles performed for non-U.S. residents increased from 1.2% (n = 1,683) in 2006 to 2.8% (n = 5,381) in 2013 (P<.001), with treatment delivered to residents of 147 countries. Compared with resident cycles, non-U.S. resident cycles had higher use of oocyte donation (10.6% vs. 42.6%), gestational carriers (1.6% vs. 12.4%), and preimplantation genetic diagnosis or screening (5.3% vs. 19.1%). U.S. resident and non-U.S. resident cycles had similar embryo transfer and multiple birth rates.
Conclusion(s): This analysis showed that non-U.S. resident cycles accounted for a growing share of all U.S. ART cycles and made higher use of specialized treatment techniques. This study provides important baseline data on CBRC in the U.S. and may also prove to be useful to organizations interested in improving access to fertility treatments.
Keywords: Assisted reproductive technology; cross-border reproductive care; gestational carriers; oocyte donation; preimplantation genetic diagnosis.
Copyright © 2017 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. All rights reserved.
Comment in
-
Cross-border reproductive care: what is its significance?Fertil Steril. 2017 Nov;108(5):761-762. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.09.027. Fertil Steril. 2017. PMID: 29102003 No abstract available.
Similar articles
-
Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance - United States, 2016.MMWR Surveill Summ. 2019 Apr 26;68(4):1-23. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.ss6804a1. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2019. PMID: 31022165 Free PMC article.
-
Assisted reproductive technology surveillance -- United States, 2010.MMWR Surveill Summ. 2013 Dec 6;62(9):1-24. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2013. PMID: 24304902
-
Assisted reproductive technology surveillance--United States, 2011.MMWR Surveill Summ. 2014 Nov 21;63(10):1-28. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2014. PMID: 25412164
-
Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance - United States, 2017.MMWR Surveill Summ. 2020 Dec 18;69(9):1-20. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.ss6909a1. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2020. PMID: 33332294 Free PMC article.
-
Assisted reproductive technology in the United States: 1997 results generated from the American Society for Reproductive Medicine/Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Registry.Fertil Steril. 2000 Oct;74(4):641-53; discussion 653-4. doi: 10.1016/s0015-0282(00)01559-4. Fertil Steril. 2000. PMID: 11020500 Review.
Cited by
-
Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance - United States, 2016.MMWR Surveill Summ. 2019 Apr 26;68(4):1-23. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.ss6804a1. MMWR Surveill Summ. 2019. PMID: 31022165 Free PMC article.
-
International gestational surrogacy in the United States, 2014-2020.Fertil Steril. 2024 Apr;121(4):622-630. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2023.12.039. Epub 2024 Jan 2. Fertil Steril. 2024. PMID: 38176517 Free PMC article.
-
Reprint: Where has the quest for conception taken us? Lessons from anthropology and sociology.Reprod Biomed Soc Online. 2021 Apr 15;11:110-121. doi: 10.1016/j.rbms.2021.03.001. eCollection 2020 Nov. Reprod Biomed Soc Online. 2021. PMID: 34136666 Free PMC article.
-
Cross border reproductive care (CBRC): a growing global phenomenon with multidimensional implications (a systematic and critical review).J Assist Reprod Genet. 2018 Jul;35(7):1277-1288. doi: 10.1007/s10815-018-1181-x. Epub 2018 May 28. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2018. PMID: 29808382 Free PMC article.
-
Preimplantation sex selection via in vitro fertilization: time for a reappraisal.F S Rep. 2023 May 26;4(3):241-243. doi: 10.1016/j.xfre.2023.05.006. eCollection 2023 Sep. F S Rep. 2023. PMID: 37719093 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Sunderam S, Kissin DM, Crawford SB, Folger SG, Jamieson DJ, Warner L, et al. Assisted reproductive technology surveillance—United States, 2013. MMWR Surveill Summ 2015;64:1–25. - PubMed
-
- Inhorn MC, Patrizio P. The global landscape of cross-border reproductive care: twenty key findings for the new millennium. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2012;24:158–63. - PubMed
-
- Ethics Committee of American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Cross-border reproductive care: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2013;100: 645–50. - PubMed
-
- Cohen IG. Patients with passports: medical tourism, law and ethics. New York: Oxford University Press; 2014.
-
- Spar D. Reproductive tourism and the regulatory map. N Engl J Med 2005; 352:531–3. - PubMed
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical